Police officer stabbed MI airport

Go Beavers

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

unsung said:

So they don't?

The reality isn't important, it's the perception of the terrorist that matters. A terrorist will say these things happen, despite the facts, process, or rationale.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Go Beavers. I feel like Timothy McVeigh's reasons for the Oklahoma attacks are very well documented and clear, and he has never wavered on the reasons he's given. But also, all of his actions in years and months and days leading up to the attack seem to confirm that his stated reasons for murdering all those people were very sincere, however misguided one might think they are.

True, his reason's were clear, but his perception led to his justifying the violence. He had to create an enemy in the federal government to carry out his actions. I mentioned it in here recently, but Bin Laden also had similar motivations. 

Yeah, the violence was obviously not cool... but right or wrong at the end of the day, his perception of the issues seemed pretty rational ... just like they do for most terrorists at the end of the day, if you really think about it. I mean, religion isn't rational at all, but the real life issues that fuel most terrorists have a basis in truth most of the time, from their perspective.

The reasons are usually based in some sort of rational truth. To go from that point, to killing others is where the irrationality happens. Often an enemy or threat needs to be created to do this. This is why I see the rhetoric from conservatives to be more dangerous, because many of them feel liberals are going to destroy the country and their way of life. 

PJ_Soul

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

unsung said:

So they don't?

The reality isn't important, it's the perception of the terrorist that matters. A terrorist will say these things happen, despite the facts, process, or rationale.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Go Beavers. I feel like Timothy McVeigh's reasons for the Oklahoma attacks are very well documented and clear, and he has never wavered on the reasons he's given. But also, all of his actions in years and months and days leading up to the attack seem to confirm that his stated reasons for murdering all those people were very sincere, however misguided one might think they are.

True, his reason's were clear, but his perception led to his justifying the violence. He had to create an enemy in the federal government to carry out his actions. I mentioned it in here recently, but Bin Laden also had similar motivations. 

Yeah, the violence was obviously not cool... but right or wrong at the end of the day, his perception of the issues seemed pretty rational ... just like they do for most terrorists at the end of the day, if you really think about it. I mean, religion isn't rational at all, but the real life issues that fuel most terrorists have a basis in truth most of the time, from their perspective.

The reasons are usually based in some sort of rational truth. To go from that point, to killing others is where the irrationality happens. Often an enemy or threat needs to be created to do this. This is why I see the rhetoric from conservatives to be more dangerous, because many of them feel liberals are going to destroy the country and their way of life. 

Yes, the actual terrorism, along with false propaganda used as recruitment strategy (both with terrorists and at least social conservatives), is where they tend to take a sharp turn away from rationalism. Actually, outside of violence, I think social conservatives are way less rational than terrorists now that I think about it, because their views often have absolutely no basis in truth or logic in the first place.

unsung

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

unsung said:

So they don't?

The reality isn't important, it's the perception of the terrorist that matters. A terrorist will say these things happen, despite the facts, process, or rationale.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Go Beavers. I feel like Timothy McVeigh's reasons for the Oklahoma attacks are very well documented and clear, and he has never wavered on the reasons he's given. But also, all of his actions in years and months and days leading up to the attack seem to confirm that his stated reasons for murdering all those people were very sincere, however misguided one might think they are.

True, his reason's were clear, but his perception led to his justifying the violence. He had to create an enemy in the federal government to carry out his actions. I mentioned it in here recently, but Bin Laden also had similar motivations. 

He didn't create an enemy to fuel his supposed desire to bomb a building.  His actions were retaliation, just like the ME terrorist's actions.  The US govt has policies that create terrorists, period.  You can't drone strike a wedding in Pakistan and actually believe you don't create enemies, just like you can't shoot an unarmed woman in the head in the Idaho woods for no reason.

PJ_Soul

unsung said:

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

unsung said:

So they don't?

The reality isn't important, it's the perception of the terrorist that matters. A terrorist will say these things happen, despite the facts, process, or rationale.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Go Beavers. I feel like Timothy McVeigh's reasons for the Oklahoma attacks are very well documented and clear, and he has never wavered on the reasons he's given. But also, all of his actions in years and months and days leading up to the attack seem to confirm that his stated reasons for murdering all those people were very sincere, however misguided one might think they are.

True, his reason's were clear, but his perception led to his justifying the violence. He had to create an enemy in the federal government to carry out his actions. I mentioned it in here recently, but Bin Laden also had similar motivations. 

He didn't create an enemy to fuel his supposed desire to bomb a building.  His actions were retaliation, just like the ME terrorist's actions.  The US govt has policies that create terrorists, period.  You can't drone strike a wedding in Pakistan and actually believe you don't create enemies, just like you can't shoot an unarmed woman in the head in the Idaho woods for no reason.

Yeah, I'd agree. Again, not to justify what he did in the end, but I still more think that, if you're going to look at it from this view, the US government created the enemy, not not the other way around. McVeigh was inspired by his bad time in the military, Ruby Ridge, and Waco.

Halifax2TheMax

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

PJ_Soul

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

Hey, I'm not making any statement about either of those events. I'm just saying, that Timothy McVeigh blamed the government for those things is at least rational. Whatever our own opinions may be, the accusations directed at the government are not nuts. It just depends on your perspective, really, even when looking at the exact same facts. And frankly, I don't think it's terribly reasonable to say that the Ruby Ridge folks should have lawyered up, given their self-proclaimed position in the whole matter. Waco on the other hand... no lawyering up or anything else was going to get those people out of that compound. Not with Koresh telling them what to do. Nonetheless, even the FBI pretty much admits they fucked up big time in Waco.

jeffbr

PJ_Soul said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

Hey, I'm not making any statement about either of those events. I'm just saying, that Timothy McVeigh blamed the government for those things is at least rational. Whatever our own opinions may be, the accusations directed at the government are not nuts. It just depends on your perspective, really, even when looking at the exact same facts. And frankly, I don't think it's terribly reasonable to say that the Ruby Ridge folks should have lawyered up, given their self-proclaimed position in the whole matter. Waco on the other hand... no lawyering up or anything else was going to get those people out of that compound. Not with Koresh telling them what to do. Nonetheless, even the FBI pretty much admits they fucked up big time in Waco.

I agree with you. McVeigh was twisted for sure, but there was a basis of truth in his convictions. I don't place a lot of blame on the feds for Waco. I believe Reno could have handled it better and not put so much faith in that idiot FBI director Louis Freeh, but Waco was 95% the result of Koresh's actions. Ruby Ridge is a completely different matter. The government is 95% responsible for that fiasco, from entrapping a guy who just wanted to be left alone with his family in the mountains, to murdering the guy's kid and his wife. That was a complete bullshit operation from the start and has forever cemented my distrust of the federal government. It illustrated what the government will do to its own people if not kept in check. And I hope that murderous assassin FBI Sniper Lon Horiuchi rots in hell when he gets there (not that I actually believe in hell).

The government may not have created Timothy McVeigh, but it certainly facilitated his creation. McVeigh made his own choices, though, and ultimately made the decision on his own to become a domestic terrorist.

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

You could not be further from the truth.

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

You could not be further from the truth.

How so?

Go Beavers

unsung said:

Go Beavers said:

PJ_Soul said:

Go Beavers said:

unsung said:

So they don't?

The reality isn't important, it's the perception of the terrorist that matters. A terrorist will say these things happen, despite the facts, process, or rationale.  

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here Go Beavers. I feel like Timothy McVeigh's reasons for the Oklahoma attacks are very well documented and clear, and he has never wavered on the reasons he's given. But also, all of his actions in years and months and days leading up to the attack seem to confirm that his stated reasons for murdering all those people were very sincere, however misguided one might think they are.

True, his reason's were clear, but his perception led to his justifying the violence. He had to create an enemy in the federal government to carry out his actions. I mentioned it in here recently, but Bin Laden also had similar motivations. 

He didn't create an enemy to fuel his supposed desire to bomb a building.  His actions were retaliation, just like the ME terrorist's actions.  The US govt has policies that create terrorists, period.  You can't drone strike a wedding in Pakistan and actually believe you don't create enemies, just like you can't shoot an unarmed woman in the head in the Idaho woods for no reason.

I disagree. Revenge would be directed at the specific people responsible who committed the offense. Generalizing across the whole federal government means you've irrationally made that whole entity the enemy. 

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

You could not be further from the truth.

How so?

You want me to explain the entire case to you?  Really?

You don't know how they set him up?  

In the end the fed govt was found at fault, and Weaver lost a wife and child.

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Both Ruby Ridge and Waco could have been avoided if the respondents to the criminal complaints had lawyered up and appeared in court, hiring the ACLU or any number of conservative right wing attorneys to take up their "cause" pro-bono (I'm thinking of the guy who wore cowboy hats and a black bolo tie, Sam Knutsler, maybe). That they chose not to and to fire on federal agents that came to take them to court, they precipitated what happened to them.

You could not be further from the truth.

How so?

You want me to explain the entire case to you?  Really?

You don't know how they set him up?  

In the end the fed govt was found at fault, and Weaver lost a wife and child.

I didn't ask you to recite the whole case. Just how am I so far from the truth? Do you deny that had weaver appeared in court to answer the charges with competent legal representation that things would have turned out the way they did? Weaver was convicted of I believe the original charge, paid I fine but it's been a while since I looked at the whole series of events. The government could have been found at fault without people dying.

unsung

All over an alleged cutting of two inches off of a barrel.  18" is ok, but 16" means prison time.  Completely ridiculous. 

And he was coerced. 

Halifax2TheMax

unsung said:

All over an alleged cutting of two inches off of a barrel.  18" is ok, but 16" means prison time.  Completely ridiculous. 

And he was coerced. 

Then clearly a jury of his peers would have agreed.

FoxyRedLa

unsung said:

All over an alleged cutting of two inches off of a barrel.  18" is ok, but 16" means prison time.  Completely ridiculous. 

And he was coerced. 

What are you even saying, haha?

They're now reporting he attempted to purchase a gun and failed.

PJ_Soul

He was talking about Ruby Ridge, not the airport guy.

Where did airport guy try to purchase a gun?

FoxyRedLa

PJ_Soul said:

He was talking about Ruby Ridge, not the airport guy.

Where did airport guy try to purchase a gun?

Ty!

No specifics on where.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/flint-airport-stabbing-suspect-allegedly-buy-gun-us/story?id=48204273

PJfanwillneverleave1

PJ_Soul said:

mfc2006 said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

I just hope that the family doesn't speak and say it was part of gods plan.

Huh? What the hell?

Yeah, I don't get it either.

It compounds things when a victims family comes out in public and accepts the death as if it was part of gods plan.  Like fuck it was.  Even though the death/stabbing was done in the name of god by the killer

unsung

Halifax2TheMax said:

unsung said:

All over an alleged cutting of two inches off of a barrel.  18" is ok, but 16" means prison time.  Completely ridiculous. 

And he was coerced. 

Then clearly a jury of his peers would have agreed.

Maybe they should have given him the correct court date.

Seriously, I mean this in the nicest way possible, research the case before making statements like that. 

PJ_Soul

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mfc2006 said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

I just hope that the family doesn't speak and say it was part of gods plan.

Huh? What the hell?

Yeah, I don't get it either.

It compounds things when a victims family comes out in public and accepts the death as if it was part of gods plan.  Like fuck it was.  Even though the death/stabbing was done in the name of god by the killer

... When did anyone ever do that though? I've never heard the families of terrorists or of the victims of terrorists say that it was part of God's plan. I think the confusion comes from you coming up with that totally random, non applicable idea out of the thin blue air, lol.